An investigation was conducted to determine if different types of metrics would affect indexing of regression following a summer vacation. Students with learning disabilities and mild mental disabilities from three elementary schools were assessed before and after a summer vacation in math and spelling using grade-level curriculum-based measurement (CBM) materials. Results indicated that the type of metric used, raw score or z-score, affected indexing of regression: Students appeared to have regressed when raw scores were analyzed but appeared not to have regressed when z-scores were analyzed. Possible explanations for this difference and suggested recommendations are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allinder, R.M., & Fuchs, L.S. (in press). Alternative ways of analyzing effects of a short school break on students with and without disabilities. School Psychology Quarterly.
2.
Allinder, R.M., & Fuchs, L.S. (1992). Effects of summer break on math and spelling performance as a function of grade level. Elementary School Journal, 92, 451-460.
3.
Allinder, R.M., & Fuchs, L.S. (1991). Effects of summer break on math skills of learning disabled and low-achieving students. B.C. Journal of Special Education, 15, 269-275.
4.
Ballinger, C. (1988). Rethinking the school calendar. Educational Leadership, 45, 57-61.
5.
Ballinger, C., Kirschenbaum, N., & Poimbeauf, R.P. (1987). The year-round school; Where learning never stops. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan Educational Foundation.
6.
Carver, R.P. (1974). Two dimensions of tests: Psychometric and edumetric . American Psychologist, 29, 512-518.
7.
Cook, J.J., & Schwarz, R.H. (1969). A look at some assumptions in special education . Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 4, 149-156.
8.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
9.
Deno, S.L., & Fuchs, L.S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19, 1-15.
10.
Dunn, L.M., & Markwardt, F.C. (1970). Peabody Individual Achievement Test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
11.
Grenier, M.A.C. (1975). An investigation of summer mathematics achievement loss and the related fall recovery time (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 3609A.
12.
Gunnerson, R., & Hummel, T. (1987). Room to grow: Year-round schools and modular construction: Two ways to handle too many students. American School and University, 60, 20-29.
Henderson, H., & Templeton, S. (1986). A developmental perspective of formal spelling instruction through alphabet, patterns, and meaning. Elementary School Journal, 86, 187-200.
15.
Jenkins, J.R., & Pany, D. (1978). Standardized achievement tests: How useful for special education? Exceptional Children, 44, 448-453.
16.
Larsen, S.C., & Hammill, D.D. (1976). Test of Written Spelling. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
17.
Leinhardt, G. (1983). Overlap: Testing whether it is taught. In G.F. Madaus (Ed.). The courts, validity, and minimum competency testing, (pp 153-170). Boston: Klewer-Nijholff Publishing, Inc.
18.
Madden, R.Gardner, E.F., Rudman, H.C., & Karlsen, B. (1973). Stanford Achievement Test. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
19.
Mastruzzi, R.R. (1987). The development of a year-round school. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 71, 123.
20.
Mehrens, W.A., & Lehmann, I.J. (1987). Using standardized tests in education (4th ed). New York: Longman.
21.
Parrish, C.A. (1989). Year-round schooling makes financial and economic sense. American School Board Journal, 176, 34-37.
22.
Shapiro, E.S., & Derr, T.F. (1987). An examination of overlap between reading curricula and standardized achievement tests. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 59-67.
23.
Shaw, T.V. (1982). Retention of selected reading and arithmetic skills by learning disabled pupils and non-disabled pupils over summer vacation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229-960).
24.
Thompson, R.H., White, K.R., & Morgan, D.P. (1982). Teacher-student interaction patterns in classrooms with mainstreamed mildly handicapped students. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 22-236.
Tindal, G., Shinn, M., & Germann, G. (1987). The effect of different metrics on interpretations of change in program evaluation. Remedial and Special Education , 8, 19-28.
